gjdgjd wrote:
The learned Prof must have had one too many jars of the black stuff the night he came up with the concept of neolithic megalithic pebble-dash. As he watched his building contractors pouring their concrete around the steel reinforcement there must have been a little voice in his head going "Noooooo!" - but if there was, he chose to ignore it....
I agree that Newgrange is not a fitting flag ship for the great chambered monuments of Ireland and accusations of Disneyfication are not without significant justification. Frankly, it looks false, as if it was built yesterday... which, in a manner of speaking, I suppose it was. In my opinion it should have been consolidated to minimise the rate of further decay until a consensus agreement could have been attained as to probable form.
However real life isn't like this. It would appear a dazzling prehistoric beacon was required, maybe for political reasons, following O'Kelly's reconstruction to represent to the world just what the Republic had to offer. And it has to be said that Newgrange does the job assigned to it as Ireland's primary national prehistoric monument.. bring in the punters and their cash, raise awareness of the world class nature of Ireland's ancient heritage.
So it is the statements of 'restoration' that I have issue with. It is not 'restored'... rather reinterpreted to fit a new agenda and I think this should be made clear to visitors. What's done is done.... taking it apart again would serve no purpose because (I think I'm right in saying) there is still no consensus of opinion.
